For Flight IIA Burkes, they don't have ready Harpoons on deck in MK-141 launchers - they were removed to make room for the helo hangers, they can fire them through Mk 41 VLS, but the fit is usually Standards and ESSM (both of which have a secondary anti-ship capability, but not as far ranging as a dedicated SSM). Also of critical importance, Ticos have four fire control illuminators, versus three for Burkes. One can never have enough FC channels.

I'd like to know how many and what type of missiles are carried by Ticos nad Burkes inside their Mk-41 VLS launchers. It looks like we have some uncertainty here because now there are quite a lot weapons available to be fitted into Mk-41:

So as I read on the Internet Burkes usually carry SM-2MR and ESSM missiles while Ticos are equipped mainly with SM-2ERs, SM-3s in addition to SM-2MRs but do not carry ESSMs. As for Tomahawks and VL-ASROCs there is always about a dozen of each weapons on-board AEGIS warship except massive surface strike scenarios when several dozen Tomahawks are loaded into Mk-41 instead of Standard missiles. Can you confirm all that?

For Flight IIA Burkes, they don't have ready Harpoons on deck in MK-141 launchers - they were removed to make room for the helo hangers, they can fire them through Mk 41 VLS, but the fit is usually Standards and ESSM (both of which have a secondary anti-ship capability, but not as far ranging as a dedicated SSM). Also of critical importance, Ticos have four fire control illuminators, versus three for Burkes. One can never have enough FC channels.

Where are you getting info re: Harpoons fired out of VLS? To my knowledge, the Harpoon is not compatible with the Mk41...ie no launcher adapter and canister for the Harpoon exists, not that it's impossible.

I'd like to know how many and what type of missiles are carried by Ticos nad Burkes inside their Mk-41 VLS launchers. It looks like we have some uncertainty here because now there are quite a lot weapons available to be fitted into Mk-41:

- Standard missiles: SM-2MR, SM-2ER, SM-3 and SM-6 in the near future

- ESSM missiles packed in quads into single VLS cell

- Tomahawks: TLAM-C, TLAM-D, TLAM Block IV

- RUM-139 VL-ASROC

- Harpoon - I don't know if Mk-41 compatible version exists at all

So as I read on the Internet Burkes usually carry SM-2MR and ESSM missiles while Ticos are equipped mainly with SM-2ERs, SM-3s in addition to SM-2MRs but do not carry ESSMs. As for Tomahawks and VL-ASROCs there is always about a dozen of each weapons on-board AEGIS warship except massive surface strike scenarios when several dozen Tomahawks are loaded into Mk-41 instead of Standard missiles. Can you confirm all that?

Actual missile loadouts will vary (due to tasking), and shouldn't really be public info anyway.

A new variation of the Tomahawk is envisioned to revive the old TASM concept with better sensor capability and the latest improvements to the airframe. However, this doesn't reconcile with the Navy's future strategy for Prompt Global Strike. The reality is that the USN doesn't have a fast or long-ranged SuW missile specifically for anti-ship purposes. This is reflective of the "Strike" philosophy that has dominated offensive capability thinking since the early 90s.

I suppose now US Navy is shifting back toward Blue Water scenarios as opposed to littoral warfare strategy which dominated navy planning just after the end of Cold War. Maybe US Navy commanders think PLAN will become major naval power in say 20 years? So that is smart move to have universal long range cruise missile like Tactical Tomahawk which can fulfill both TLAM-C and TASM tasks.
Besides I think premier US Navy asset to sestroy enemy surface vessels is still carrier based aviation carrying AGM-84D/G Harpoons and AGM-84H/K SLAM-ERs. I am also not sure if some Harpoon Block II/III features were not introduced into US Navy Harpoon Block I missiles during maintenance upgrades.

I suppose now US Navy is shifting back toward Blue Water scenarios as opposed to littoral warfare strategy which dominated navy planning just after the end of Cold War. Maybe US Navy commanders think PLAN will become major naval power in say 20 years? So that is smart move to have universal long range cruise missile like Tactical Tomahawk which can fulfill both TLAM-C and TASM tasks.

Besides I think premier US Navy asset to sestroy enemy surface vessels is still carrier based aviation carrying AGM-84D/G Harpoons and AGM-84H/K SLAM-ERs. I am also not sure if some Harpoon Block II/III features were not introduced into US Navy Harpoon Block I missiles during maintenance upgrades.

I'm not sure about the Blue Water concept. If you read between the lines for Strategy 21C and now the NOC 2010 documents, littoral warfare is still predominant. Case in point - look at the projected force structure for the future. LCS will become the low-end combatant, and it's not a blue-water combatant. No AAW capability beyond self-defense RAM, limited numbers of MR SSM missiles designed to engage small boats and soft land targets (assuming the NLOS replacement will at least equal the original 45 count), a very basic sensor suite and the need to swap out modules in order to conduct different missions. On the strategic side, there is a focus on Martime Security Cooperation, calling upon allies who are better situated (i.e., the nations who have the coastlines and water that need to be patrolled) to do some of the heavy lifting while the US provides logistical or other soft support.

Your observations about carrier aviation are absolutely spot on. This is why China is focusing on AA/AD technology like the DF-21 ASBM. But in sheer numbers, China could potentially be putting out as many as a 3:1 combatant ratio (minus carriers) and as noted in the new Pakistani FFG article elsewhere, the stuff that's coming off the ways is quality, nothing to sneeze at. Assuming aviation is somehow parried, it could become a real exciting but hort shooting war for Seventh Fleet.